[Beowulf] IEEE 1588 (PTP) - a better cluster clock?
Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.
Patrick Geoffray patrick at myri.comTue Jul 24 13:11:02 PDT 2007
- Previous message: [Beowulf] IEEE 1588 (PTP) - a better cluster clock?
- Next message: [Beowulf] IEEE 1588 (PTP) - a better cluster clock?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Hi Jim, Jim Lux wrote: > Highly parallelized real time signal processing? Seems like a classic Wouldn't you need a real-time OS and a real-time communication layer to do real-time processing? Or at least within the same level of time accuracy ? The Linux scheduler is still on a 10ms quantum of time, and QoS in network is still about what to drop first, not guaranteeing resources. If PTP is as good (accuracy, resource usage) as the specialized methods, then using a common implementation is the best deal. However, application-specific/architecture-specific synchronization may be more efficient. The trade-off is between the performance of the first versus the cost of the second. That's the rule behind commodity solutions. Patrick
- Previous message: [Beowulf] IEEE 1588 (PTP) - a better cluster clock?
- Next message: [Beowulf] IEEE 1588 (PTP) - a better cluster clock?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
